Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 4
KRCB (PBS) 2
CSPAN2 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KQED (PBS) 1
LINKTV 1
WETA 1
LANGUAGE
English 12
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
, which france says it would back. eu foreign ministers have been talking about the conflict, agreeing that african troops should take over from the french asap. >> here's more on the story beginning with germany's involvement. >> german aircraft could soon be used to support french intervention in mali, providing mid-air refueling to french planes as they go to combat zones. the proposed increase in german military involvement has been welcomed by lawmakers from the governing coalition. >> it is about making more support available to our french partners. to help make sure that mali does not turn into a breeding ground for international terrorists. >> germany has already provided two military transport planes to help transport african union troops with a third ready if needed, but further help will require approval from parliament. the green party do not see it as a simple yes vote. >> the crucial thing about this military involvement is that it must lead to a political process because the military cannot solve the problem. >> parliament must also approve a planned eu training mission
to pay off the interest on the bed and italy having to ask for a bailout the eu and eurozone have to -- cannot afford. but we are still a ways from that. we are not seeing the interest that we saw at the end of the berlusconi era. the markets -- the markets are cautious but as soon as there is some idea what will happen politically, the better. >> live in rome. the uncertainty in italy has worried eurozone politicians who had been pleased about the cuts and tax rises mario monti's government put into place to control the country's economy. >> it is not my role to comment or put myself in the place of italian electors. we need a strong italy, european italy. and italy that is reforming itself and taking its rightful place in the orchestra of change your europe needs. >> it is important that italy not only in the interest of italy but in the interests of all europe will soon form a stable and functioning government. it is important for italy and because italy is such an important country in europe, olive europe that a stable and functioning government is formed. r inut governor of l
in western and north western africa. they are considered or seen by the e.u., france, as the least problematic state of the sierra. the number of youth recruited into al-qaeda so far remains very small, and they attack on soil, lack sophistication. capabilities are extremely limited, and it's affiliated networks are disorganized and weak today. the government's aggressive pursuit and imprisonment pursuit of violence extremists temporarily disrupted the growth, but like other countries, niger, are faced with the challenge of ensuring control over the borders. i mean, mori tan ya shares a long border with mali, 2240 kilometers. it's even more than algeria which it shares 1300 kilometers a border with mali. border management plays a key role in counter in all forms of smuggling and, also, as i said the fighters in northern mali, so they have adopted an aggressive approach to fight violent extremists, more than the neighbors, definitely more than mali. for example, they equipped its airport, three airports with i.t. systems. it has full passport readers, it has built 27 # -- 27 posts t
as a terrorist organization. the second thing, in 2006 you were one of 12 senators who refused to position the e.u. to identify hezbollah as a terrorist group. third, in november of twee, you failed to -- 2003, you failed to vote on a syrian accountability act with sanctions -- occupation of lebanon. four, in 2001, you were one of only two senators that year to vote against renewal of the iran-libya sanctions act. and lastly, in 2001, you were one of four senators who refused to sign the letter supporting israel. are those accurate? >> well, let's start with the -- >> no. i just want to know if the statement -- these are votes that took place. do you agree those votes took place? >> i want to ask the letter that you just noted in your fifth point, what was the date in the letter? >> the date. >> you said i refused to sign letter. >> october of 2001. >> a letter to -- >> ok. skip that one. is the other ones true? >> well, it was fairly important -- >> it's very important. i was holding the letter at the time that we were gathering signatures. >> i see. on the 2008 question regarding designating the
to the e.u. asking hezbollah to be designated a terrorist organization, being one of 22 to vote to designate the iranian revolutionary guard a terrorist organization, being one of two on two occasions to vote against sanctions that this body was trying to impose on iran, the statements you made about palestinians and about the jewish lobby, all that together. that the image you created is one of sending the worst possible signal to our enemies and friends at one of the most critical times in world history? >> no, i would not agree with that. because i have taken actions and made statements very clear as to what i believe hezbollah and hamas are as a terrorist organizations. >> if you had a chance tomorrow, today, after lunch, to vote to say that the iranian revolutionary guard was a terrorist organization. would you still vote no? >> the reason i voted no to start with... >> well i know why, you told me that. my question is would you reconsider and would you vote yes this time? or would you still vote no? >> times change. i recognize that and, yes, i would reconsider. >> well, t
asking the e.u. designates hezbollah as a terrorist organization. >> reporter: graham called him one most unqualified, radical choices for secretary of defense in a long time, jenna. jenna: those comments out there. the obama administration not too happy about the comments and the process being held up. what is the administration saying about why it need the new national security team now? >> reporter: keep in mind the smart considering nominations for new secretary of defense. a nominee for cia director. president's new white house chief of staff offered this reminder we live in a dangerous world. >> between john brennan, the cia director and chuck hagel as secretary of defense we want to make sure we have those guys sitting in the chairs working because i don't want there to be something missed because of this hang up here in washington. >> reporter: you won't see action this week due to the president's day recess but capitol hill sources say the hagel nomination will be likely taken up a week from tomorrow. jenna: we'll watch that, mike, thank you. >> reporter: thank you. jon: for more
sanctions is by legislation, under the legislation, and then we have the e.u. sanctions and others that people follow mandated by the security council. the e.u. seems to be more flexible than we are, so there is operating room there. there is operating room in not putting more sanctions on the table could be helpful as an initial step. that would be important. each one of these the president would have to explain he is getting value, that the europeans to take sanctions off central banks and petroleum. that we could do things that i think are absolutely necessary. we have had a longstanding policy of not sanctioning food and medicine for good reasons, and when i was in the security council, in iraq we made them carefully. that got screwed up in oil for food, and i do not want to talk about that, but that was an example of how things could go wrong. the basis was the right basis and that even in the worst of all possible situations, you cannot punish the population, particularly, for the sins of their leaders, especially if they did not choose the leaders. we have a situation where
refused to position the e.u. to identify hezbollah as a terrorist group. third, in november of twee, you failed to -- 2003, you failed to vote on a syrian accountability act with sanctions -- occupation of lebanon. four, in 2001, you were one of only two senators that year to vote against renewal of the iran-libya sanctions act. and lastly, in 2001, you were one of four senators who refused to sign the letter supporting israel. are those accurate? >> well, let's start with the -- >> no. i just want to know if the statement -- these are votes that took place. do you agree those votes took place? >> i want to ask the letter that you just noted in your fifth point, what was the date in the letter? >> the date. >> you said i refused to sign letter. >> october of 2001. >> a letter to -- >> ok. skip that one. is the other ones true? >> well, it was fairly important -- >> it's very important. i was holding the letter at the time that we were gathering signatures. >> i see. on the 2008 question regarding designating the revolutionary guard as a terrorist organization, i did vote against it. >> i
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)